Chattisgarh High Court
Rahul Gupta vs Chhattisgarh State Information … on 5 August, 2025
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2025:CGHC:38634-DB
Digitally
signed by
SHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
2025.08.05
19:04:34
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WA No. 562 of 2025
1 - Rahul Gupta S/o Pawan Kumar Gupta Aged About 42 Years R/o
M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur 492001 (Chhattisgarh),
Chhattisgarh
... Appellant
versus
1 - Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Sector 19, North
Block, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
492002, Chhattisgarh
2 - Station House Officer And Public Information Officer, Police
Station Mahila Thana Ambikapur 497001 District Surguja
(Chhattisgarh), Chhattisgarh
3 - Additional Superintendent Of Police And First Appellate
Authority Office Of Supeintendent Of Police, Ambikapur- 497001
District Surguja (Chhattisgarh)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
2
For Appellant : Shri Rahul Gupta, Appellant in person
For Respondent No. 1 :Shri Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani,
Advocate
For Respondent No. 2 & 3 :Shri S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
05.08.2025
1. The present writ appeal has been filed with the following
prayer:-
” 3.1 Admit this writ appeal and Set aside the impugned
order dated 17.06.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Single Bench
in W.P.(C) No. 2054 of 2025.
3.2 Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding
Respondent No. 2 to forthwith furnish the complete and
accurate information sought by the Petitioner in the RTI
application dated 05.07.2023 (Annexure P-3), in strict and
immediate compliance with the order dated 03.02.2025
passed by Respondent No. 1 (Annexure P-7).
3.3 Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding
Respondent No. 1 (State Information Commission) to
immediately exercise its powers under Section 20 of the RTI
Act to initiate, conduct, and conclude, within a time- frame
stipulated by this Hon’ble Court, proceedings for the
imposition of the maximum permissible penalty upon
Respondent No. 2 for the willful non- compliance with its
order, and ensure recovery thereof.
3.4 Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the false
3reply to subsequent RTI applications (Annexure P-10 (Colly.))
filed by Respondent No. 2 (Annexure P-11) and the
consequential order passed by Respondent No. 3 (Annexure
P-12).
3.5 Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding
Respondent No. 1 (State Information Commission) to
immediately exercise its powers under Sections 18 and 20 of
the RTI Act to ensure compliance by Respondent No. 2 with
its order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure P-7).
3.6 appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding
Respondent No. 1 to immediately initiate, conduct, and
conclude, within a time-frame stipulated by this Hon’ble
Court, proceedings under Section 20(1) for the imposition of
the maximum permissible penalty upon Respondent No. 2
for unjustified delay and willful non-compliance with its
order dated 03.02.2025, and ensure recovery thereof
according to law.
3.7 Issue appropriate directions to Respondent No. 2 to
ensure that all pending and future RTI applications filed by
the Petitioner, pertaining to ongoing legal matters
necessitating information for their defense, are dealt with
and disposed of strictly in accordance with the time limits
and provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, without requiring
repeated interventions.
3.8 Direct the Respondents, jointly and severally, to pay
adequate monetary compensation to the Petitioner for the
profound harassment, mental agony, financial loss
(including litigation costs), and prejudice suffered due to
the protracted denial of information and violation of
fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 and
and as provided for under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act.
4
3.9 Award the costs of this litigation in favour of the
Petitioner and against the Respondents.
3.10 Recommend to the competent disciplinary authority to
consider initiating appropriate disciplinary proceedings
against Respondent No. 2 for dereliction of statutory duties
and defiance of lawful orders, and against Respondent No.
3 for failure of adequate supervision, in accordance with
the applicable service rules.
3.11 Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”
2. At the very outset, appellant in person submits that he wants
to withdraw this appeal with liberty to approach the learned
Single Judge.
3. Accordingly, the instant Writ Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
with the liberty as stated supra.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Shoaib/Amardeep